Wednesday, April 09, 2008

Baptist Faith & Message Article XVII. Religious Liberty

XVII. Religious Liberty

God alone is Lord of the conscience, and He has left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are contrary to His Word or not contained in it. Church and state should be separate. The state owes to every church protection and full freedom in the pursuit of its spiritual ends. In providing for such freedom no ecclesiastical group or denomination should be favored by the state more than others. Civil government being ordained of God, it is the duty of Christians to render loyal obedience thereto in all things not contrary to the revealed will of God. The church should not resort to the civil power to carry on its work. The gospel of Christ contemplates spiritual means alone for the pursuit of its ends. The state has no right to impose penalties for religious opinions of any kind. The state has no right to impose taxes for the support of any form of religion. A free church in a free state is the Christian ideal, and this implies the right of free and unhindered access to God on the part of all men, and the right to form and propagate opinions in the sphere of religion without interference by the civil power.

Liberty of religion is an idea and law that modern day Americans take for granted. Every living person born in America that is living today has always been privileged to this freedom. For that reason I will define religious liberty as the term is rarely used today. Religious liberty is the freedom given to people to practice their faith and religious beliefs without any interference, especially by Kings and Princes in days past and by governments largely today.

The primary driving force behind this belief of religious liberty is that any forced or coerced prescription of religious beliefs upon a person or people against his or her will does not honor God. The assumption followed here, in a pluralistic society, is that no god desires forced submission and worship. However, there are many adherents to many religions who do not adhere to this assumption.

Baptist History and Religious Liberty

Religious Liberty as we have come to know it expressed in the Western World derives from Christian belief because it is the generally accepted position that the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ does not desire worship that is forced or coerced. Now there have been certain people who have gone under the banner of Christ who have thought the opposite, but by in large this practice has been rejected today.

The rejection of forced coercion to Christianity as a movement has many of its roots in Baptist life. Baptists were some of the first Christians who systematically fought for religious liberty. And many good Christian men and women were persecuted for their participation in this movement to liberate the conscience away from the state.

The first sentence in the BF&M states, Baptists believe, “God alone is Lord of the conscience, and He has left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are contrary to His Word or not contained in it.” Early leaders in this movement believed that every person should have the right to interpret Scripture and commune with God according to their own consciences, not having to be led by men or a creed they differed with in interpretation.

John Spilsbury, the first pastor of Particular Baptists wrote, “No conscience ought to be forced in the matters of Religion, because no man can bear out another in his account to God (Nettles, An Exposition from the Faculty of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary on the Baptist Faith & Message 2000, 41).” John Smyth, one of the earliest Baptists wrote while in exile, “The prince must leave the Christian religion free to every man’s conscience (Nettles, Exposition of the Baptist Faith & Message, 41).”

Baptist forefathers, long before men like John Clarke and Thomas Jefferson, were writing and championing Religious Liberty (Nettles, Exposition of the Baptist Faith & Message, 41).” But not only were Christians championing the rights of men to freely exercise the Christian religion without interference from civil authorities or state endorsed churches, some were championing the right of all men to practice any religion in freedom. For example, Thomas Helwys said, “Let them be heretics, Turcks, Jewes or whatever it apperteynes not to the earthly power to punish them in the least measure (Nettles, Exposition of the Baptist Faith & Message, 41).”

The State and the Church

The battle for the freedom to practice religion in the Western world sprang from a rebellion against State Churches which dictated what could and could not be believed and what could and could not be practiced in Christian religion. In many lands, the Roman Catholic Church was the only recognized church and was the authority on every spiritual matter. In Germany, after the Reformation is was the Lutheran Church. In England it became the Church of England. In Scotland, it became the Presbyterian Church. And whatever the official church position was on a subject there was little room for differences. Thus, the religious liberty movement, which includes Southern Baptists, expressly state, “Church and state should be separate.”

We believe the state or governing authority has a role in religion, but it is not to dictate what the church should believe and how it should practice its belief. Instead, religious liberty advocates have taught that the state’s obligations to the church should be to ensure its freedom to worship without any interference. The BF&M states it this way, “The state owes to every church protection and full freedom in the pursuit of its spiritual ends. In providing for such freedom no ecclesiastical group or denomination should be favored by the state more than others.”

Christian advocates of religious liberty see the state as an ordained means by which God providentially executes justice based upon Roman 13. However, the state is not to interfere in the local church domain. The two should remain distinct. Membership in the state does not entail membership in a church. The BF&M endorses this principle as it reads, “Civil government being ordained of God, it is the duty of Christians to render loyal obedience thereto in all things not contrary to the revealed will of God.”

The BF&M further addresses how these two institutions interact at the end of the article. It reads, “The state has no right to impose penalties for religious opinions of any kind. The state has no right to impose taxes for the support of any form of religion. A free church in a free state is the Christian ideal, and this implies the right of free and unhindered access to God on the part of all men, and the right to form and propagate opinions in the sphere of religion without interference by the civil power.”

The freedom to express religious views has come under attack particularly over the issue of homosexuality. In our society today, the mere utterance that homosexuality is a sin will lead to the charge that you are homophobic. In a few countries in Europe and in Canada, pastors have been arrested and fined for merely reading Bible passages condemning homosexuality and expressing God’s judgment and condemnation of the practice.

These pastors have been arrested under hate speech laws. Activists in the homosexual community are trying to silence all opposition against homosexuality and these hate speech laws have been used to silence any criticism. Hate speech is any speech which is deemed to be potentially incendiary, and which might cause violence.

Now these pastors who have been arrested for hate speech are in no way calling for any violence against homosexuals. All they are doing is faithfully preaching against the sins the Bible names. Our very own country might see this same practice of jailing anyone who opposes homosexuality and speaks of it as a sin which God detests. As the BF&M states, we believe, “a free church in a free state is the Christian ideal, and this implies…the right to form and propagate opinions in the sphere of religion without interference by the civil power.”

Kingdom Work vs. Civil Work

Baptists have traditionally argued for a separation of church and state. However, Baptists still believe there is a place for the state to obediently carry out God’s ordained will for it as an institution. A real mess arises however, when Baptists or any other Christian group seeks to do God’s will primarily through the means of civil government. The Baptist Faith & Message says, “The church should not resort to the civil power to carry on its work.”

Southern Baptists need to strike a healthy balance of how to involve themselves in the civil arena. On the one hand, the political arena should never be our primary focus for how we meaningfully persuade people to embrace Jesus and his teachings. On the other hand, we should not completely neglect this avenue as a means to be salt and light. The example and work of William Wilberforce is an example of the good a Christian can bring about through government.

The bottom line is this: Genuine and permanent change can only be realized through the reception of the Holy Spirit and the reception of the Holy Spirit can only be attained through repentance of sins and faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. And most Christians agree that it is not the responsibility of any government to be the propagator of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Instead this responsibility and privilege has been given to the Church of God which is the pillar and support of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15).”

The Divine Origin of the Kingdom

The BF&M message says concerning Religious Liberty, “The gospel of Christ contemplates spiritual means alone for the pursuit of its ends.” At the heart of this statement is the Christian belief that God’s will is accomplished through a divine power. This world was created by God. This world is saved by God. This world will be renewed and transformed by God.

No human initiative or creation will be sufficient to save our souls from God’s judgment on account of our sin. No human initiative or creation will be able to make this world as it was in the beginning, only power of God will suffice. And understanding God’s overarching aim in history will help the church to understand where its primary focus should be.

In the New Creation, governments will pass away. In the New Creation, Congresses will cease to legislate. In the New Creation, there will be only one King, one Lord, one Prince. Jesus Christ will be known and named and honored as the King of kings, the Lord of lords, and the Prince of Peace.

Therefore it is the great responsibility and privilege of the church, his bride, to preach the gospel of Jesus. It is our means to increase his kingdom and see it advance today. AMEN.